coaltide | *Notices Yuletide*

OwO What's This?

Monday 15 to Friday 26 September: Nominations (end 9pm UTC 26 September) | Evidence Post | RPF Coordination | Promo Post
Tuesday 14 to Friday 24 October: Sign-ups (end 9pm UTC 24 October)
Sunday 26 October: Assignments out (may be earlier)
Wednesday 10 December: Default deadline (9pm UTC)
Wednesday 17 December: Assignment deadline (9pm UTC)
Wednesday 24 December: Main collection works reveals (9pm UTC)
Thursday 25 December: Madness collection works reveals (9pm UTC)
Thursday 1 January: Author reveals, end of event (9pm UTC)

Mini-Challenges:

Crueltide | Femslash Festivus | Yulebuilding | Three Turtle Doves | Two for One | Yuleporn
Family Matters | Queering the Tide | Yuletide Madness Drabble Invitational | TransTide
Chromatic Yuletide | Unconventionyule | Wrapping Paper | Babytide | MultiLingYule

Yuletide Discord for Hippos & Exchanges After Dark Discords for Namespace ~~drama~~ 18+ discussion. Google Group for PHs.

yuletide |

yuletide_admin | App
2025 Collection | Tagset | Letters

Flat / Recent | Top-Level (Last) | FAQ | Search

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

They did not push back in the chat at all. Whoever posted here said nothing to defend the recipient on the server, their reaction was to run to coal to vent about it.

I don't understand why someone would be upset about something being posted to a semi-public locked server and react by reposting things in actual public. It makes zero sense.

They're a coward.

It stings when someone privately thinks server behavior crosses a line but won't speak up about it in response to actual behavior.

But a lot of servers are like that.

Oddly this server isn't like that. There are pushbacks and discussions all the time. It's not uncommon at all there for someone to express that too much information is being posted (which generally results in that information being deleted) or that people are overblowing something better explained in a kinder way (which results in everyone softening their language or dropping the conversation).

I don't know why, in that climate, they weren't willing to say something there but were willing to post it here.

This comment is quite bizzarre. The implicit message you're sending is that the server has a relaxed atmosphere that encourages pushing back against misbehavior, which nobody did, including you. Therefore you believe everything was just fine?

Someone did, actually, just not with all of OPs concerns. OP could have easily followed that to bring up additional issues without it seeming at all unusual, instead they posted here.

From my perspective--I wasn't there during the initial conversation and showed up later--this was just another conversation where someone crossed a line, someone else told them they crossed that line, and then everyone backed off.

from the quotes posted, either someone did way more than cross a line, or it was several people who crossed it. and i'm leaning towards both.

"Someone" crossed a line? Really?

Someone did, actually, just not with all of OPs concerns.

I haven't seen this in the stuff posted.

There was pushback against E_O's unhinged reading of the situation, but it doesn't sound like there was much pushback against the RS mod posting these things in the way they did.

I can actually totally believe the server is normally better than that, but it matters a lot who's around to provide that kind of pushback, from the sound of it.

Spare us the "just a few bad apples" crap.

I think for someone who is a bit conflict averse it makes sense, and if it's motivated by dislike of EO maybe it makes even more sense.

It makes emotional sense but isn't actually acceptable behavior, IMO. I say that as someone who is also conflict averse.

It's easy to "address" conflict by posting about it anonymously. It can feel validating to get engagement when you do so. Really, though, it's avoiding the uncomfortable parts of the conflict; it's the very definition of passive-aggressive. I don't think we should kid ourselves that it improves anyone's situation, including a recipient who did not agree to have explicit detail of their private exchange experience posted here any more than they consented to have it posted in the mod chat.

Oh, well if you're conflict averse that's fine then!

CYRT

I'm not saying it's fine - but the message I replied to said it made no sense. I explained how it made sense. It makes sense if the reporter is a conflict averse person with a grudge. The actions fit together if you think about it from that point of view. It's possible to understand human behavior without endorsing it.

cyrt

Gotcha.

Yeah. I'm not in that server and like to think myself pretty bold with calling people out on their shit, but also, honestly, it can get very old after a while. If I'm having to do that regularly, I will probably reevaluate if it's worth it sticking around in that community.

I spoke up once about a similar situation elsewhere and all it got me was grief and the impression that I made the wank worse by making a big deal out of it.

I agree that posting logs for anonspace to wank about is a bad way to go about addressing that kind of server climate issue, but at the same time, it's also a symptom of the server climate being a certain way.

I get that, but when someone did call it out a few hours later, they didn't suffer consequences.

OP reported it after that.

To me that does not suggest a climate of suppression where it's impossible to call out bad behavior.

CYRT

I thought it interesting that one of the people calling EO out was the server mod... but they did it in a way that felt very dismissive towards the recipient's concerns too.

I would love someone who's actually in the server to comment on the climate.

Notices Yuletide

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal

Re: Mod Cabal